The Bulletin
Division of School & District Effectiveness
November 2015
"Advancing leadership-- Transforming schools"
Purposes
The SDE Bulletin: to provide regular, timely information to increase the shared understanding of our team of School & District Effectiveness professionals
Our Shared SDE Purpose: to increase collective leadership capacity to understand what effective schools and districts know and do, and to support the leaders to own their improvement processes
Previous Editions of The Bulletin
August 2014- https://www.smore.com/700mx
September 2014- https://www.smore.com/huyyh
October 2014- https://www.smore.com/std20
November 2014- https://www.smore.com/09uva
December 2014/January 2015- https://www.smore.com/09uva
February- https://www.smore.com/hrzfv
March 2015- https://www.smore.com/6wsrq
April 2015- https://www.smore.com/9vbmj
May 2015- https://www.smore.com/gwjuk
June 2015- https://www.smore.com/4suf4
July 2015- https://www.smore.com/kk5zr
August 2015- https://www.smore.com/uek4p
September 2015- https://www.smore.com/puabs
October 2015- https://www.smore.com/thryq
This Month
I was really impressed with how ILA was constructed by Joann, Christy, and Andrea, and with the engagement of SDE and RESA folks with their schools and districts. Fantastic job, everyone! I hope you got some ideas about what to do (and even NOT to do) at your upcoming region ILAs.
I asked a few people from SDE and RESAs the following question:
As a result of the 2 ILA days in Athens, what one thing will I consider changing about the work I do with schools and/or districts?
Cheryl Hunley:
I will encourage schools to utilize the resources that are available online with their leadership teams. The Indistar resources we looked at during the sessions prompted positive conversations at the table. All have participated in the region QCIS PL and school PL and I believe the presentations clarified the process.
Darrel May:
ILA was a great learning experience, but the nugget that I want to investigate further to enhance my work with the districts I serve are the rich resources available on www.mentormodules.com.
Charles Price:
One quote I heard several times was "don't go chasing 1/2 points in CCRPI" That was great advice and the approach I plan to emphasize with my schools. There is a good reason for the increased emphasis on the Progress Score and a school wide focus on growth at all levels will pay big CCRPI dividends. It certainly did for Indian Creek!
Kristy Kueber:
I plan to be more intentional when discussing implementation of school initiatives with school leaders. I will encourage school personnel to apply the Process for Implementation discussed on ILA day two. This process will help us develop a deep understanding of the initiative or practice, clearly identify expectations, and systematically plan the rollout, professional learning, and follow-up required to ensure effective implementation.
I will align GaDOE resource documents to assist school personnel as they implement new practices and initiatives. The Georgia Milestones Achievement Level Descriptors, System for Effective School Instruction, and the Georgia Performance Standards Leadership Guides are a few powerful resources I will keep at hand to better support school leaders.
Practice what I preach. Our goal is to build capacity of school and district personnel to engage in and implement processes and systems to support school improvement. The same cycle (assess, plan, implement, monitor) and deliberate thought that goes into this process should also be applied to my work as a school improvement specialist. Therefore, a next step for my practice is to be more focused and process oriented in the support that I provide to schools and districts.
From Areas/Regions
Phillip Luck, North; Sam Taylor, Metro; Patty Rooks, South
The Area Program Managers are in the process of working with the District Effectiveness Specialists and School Effectiveness Team Leads to plan for the upcoming Region Leadership Team meetings. The primary purpose of the Region Leadership Team meeting is “to develop, monitor, and improve the Region Support Plan." As this concept is new to everyone both within and external to the School and District Effectiveness Division, we believe that it is extremely important that these meetings have similar formats and agendas to ensure consistency and continuity across all areas/regions of the state.
The composition of the Region Leadership Team may include the following positions: Area Program Manager, Region DE Specialists, Region Leads, Area Program Assessment Specialists, Core RESA Specialists, Title I Specialists, GaDOE Special Education Representatives, GLRS Directors, TLE Specialists, C&I Specialists, and Accountability Specialists. Therefore, individuals in these positions will bring their data and the team will begin to develop a region support plan based on the universal needs identified by these divisions/departments.
It is important to note that the focus of the Region Leadership Team meeting is on the universal needs of the region, although we will still support the unique needs of each of the designated schools. We are excited about working with other divisions/departments and agencies to coordinate our resources and efforts through the region support plan. Let us enter this new endeavor with the understanding that “the whole (all members on the Region leadership) is greater than its parts (for example, just SDE)”. Again, we are excited about these upcoming Region Leadership Team meetings.
(We will contact the different Region Leadership Team members to solidify dates, times, and locations.)
From the Atlanta Support Office
Professional Learning Support
Christy Jones & Andrea Cruz
October ILA
Thank you for your participation in our October ILA. It was a wonderful opportunity for our school and district leaders to receive two days of powerful professional learning. The content provided will align our work with our SDE goals. We appreciate your support with making this a successful event!
December SDE PL
Please mark your calendars and plan to attend our SDE PL on December 15th and 16th at the Decatur Courtyard Marriott. Tentative topics include: GaDOE Strategic Plan, Data Literacy, Regional Spotlights, and Job Alikes. Additional details will be forthcoming in the near future.
Professional Learning Tidbit
Through my work with Learning Forward, I encountered an article about learning organizations. Learning organizations give us the opportunity to think critically and creatively, the ability to communicate ideas and concepts and the ability to cooperate with other people in the process of inquiry and action. Individuals in a learning organization learn to express ideas and challenge themselves to contribute to an improved work environment by participating in a paradigm shift from the traditional authoritarian workplace philosophy to one where the hierarchy is broken down and human potential is heralded. Learning organizations challenge all employees to tap into their inner resources and potential, in hopes that they can build their own community based on principles of liberty, humanity, and a collective will to learn.
Source: http://www.moyak.com/papers/learning-organization.html
Strategy of the Month
Each month we’ll provide a PL strategy that could be used with adults or students. Our goal is to deepen learning and engage the learner.
Title: Question Cards
Description: Have participants play Question Cards and develop questions around a topic or lesson.
Directions: Pass out index cards to groups with “What? Who? When? Where? and How? ” written on the cards. Participants “play” their cards by creating questions about the topic. For example, if the focus is on digital storytelling resources, someone might inquire, “What apps would you recommend?”
Another person's query might be, “How would you use that app?” During the activity, participants share and answer the questions they have created during the opener. Question cards facilitate questioning by every participant, not just a select few. Plus, it’s much more engaging to seek answers to questions participants have developed themselves rather than those from somewhere else. You can have each participant come up with one question of their choice or questions for each W and the H.
Intended Audience: Students or Adults
Source: The Precious First Few Minutes Of Class | TeachThought
Operational Support
Cindy Popp, Region Resources; Gary Wenzel, Operations
IT Updates Webinar on Friday, November 6 at 9:00 AM.
This month’s webinar is for GaDOE staff only, as we will be discussing the Microsoft IT Academy. Please plan to join us.
“With the Microsoft IT Academy (ITA) program, academic institutions and their educators, students and staff get digital curriculum and certifications for fundamental technology skills -- as well as courses critical for students to be successful in today's technologically evolving world.”
Federal Support
Karen Suddeth and Melvina Crawl- SIG/1003(g)
Cohort 3 (July 1, 2013-September 30, 2016)
Bibb County- Matilda Hartley Elementary School; Westside High School
Fulton County- Frank McClarin High School
Gwinnett County- Meadowcreek High School
Quitman County- Quitman County High School
Twiggs County- Twiggs County High School
Wilkinson County- Wilkinson County High School
Cohort 4 (July 1, 2015-September 30, 2017)
Atlanta Public Schools- Frederick Douglass High School
Bibb County- Southwest Magnet High School and Law Academy
Dougherty County- Dougherty County Comprehensive High School; Monroe Comprehensive High School
Muscogee County- Fox Elementary School; Jordan Vocational High School; William H. Spencer High School
Fiscal Reminders
With the closeout of FY15 funds on October 30th, Cohort 3 and Cohort 4 schools are now operating solely with FY2016 funding. As school has been in session for as long as three months, our SIG schools should be well into the implementation of this year’s initiatives.
In order to maximize the impact of the resources provided by the grant, all equipment, supplies and materials to be purchased with this year’s SIG funds should now be procured, and the drawdown for the expenditures for these resources is expected to occur no later than November. It is also expected that funds for all SIG salaries and associated benefits for the months of July, August, September and October be drawn from the state no later than the November drawdown, as well.
The monthly drawdown deadline for SIG LEAs is the 20th of each month. It is expected that the drawdown include all SIG expenditures (including salaries and associated benefits) from the previous month. It is important to note that the timeliness of drawdowns is a critical factor when considering the recommendation for continued SIG funding.
LEA Monitoring of SIG Schools
As noted last month, this year LEAs with SIG Cohort 3 and/or Cohort 4 schools will be responsible for submitting LEA Monitoring Reports in QCIS/Indistar for each of their SIG schools. The format and content of the monitoring report allows the SIG Coordinator, in collaboration with key leaders at the district level, to assess the level of progress of the LEA/school in implementing the SIG indicators. The electronic LEA Monitoring Report forms can be accessed from the District Dashboard and are to be completed and submitted within QCIS/Indistar. The Q1 LEA Monitoring Report was to have been submitted by September 30th. The remaining monitoring reports are due January 30th and April 30th, respectively. Further, in the event that an indicator is either not progressing at an expected rate or not evident, an interim LEA monitoring of those indicators will be required and will be submitted in QCIS/Indistar, as well.
2015-2016 Reward Incentive Plan
Notification and guidance regarding the 2015-2016 Reward Incentive Plan was forwarded to the SIG Coordinators in late September. The plan is to be submitted for review/approval to the Lead no later than November 13th. Please be reminded that, as the US ED SIG Guidance related to rewards and incentives has not changed for the 2015-16 school year, last year’s requirements will remain in effect. The process by which the Plan was determined, as well as the notification of the GaDOE approved plan to the school staff should be documented within QCIS/Indistar.
Critical Dates for 1003(g) SIG Schools (Cohorts 3 & 4)
October 30th – SEA Monitoring Report due in QCIS/Indistar
October 30th – Completion Reports due – FY15 funds expended
October 30th – ILT Plans/Table Uploaded to Filing Cabinet in QCIS/Indistar
November 5th – Required Monthly Reports due (Teacher Attendance, Student Attendance, Discipline Data)
November 13th—Deadline for Submission of 2015-2016 Reward Incentive Plan – submit to Leads and copy SIG Program Specialists
November 15th – LEA Self-Assessment on 8 Key Georgia District Performance Standards (& SIG Indicators as applicable)
November 19th – FY16 School Improvement Plans uploaded to Filing Cabinet in QCIS/Indistar
November 20th – Monthly drawdown by LEA’s due for all SIG expenses encumbered to date
November 30th – Interim LEA Monitoring (as applicable)
Professional learning needs were identified from the recent survey conducted for SIG 1003(g). Planning for upcoming webinars focused on these needs will be scheduled and announced.
From the Literature
RtI, PBIS, and MTSS: An evolution, a revolution, or roses by other names?
Dr. Adena Miller
If your state is anything like Colorado, Florida, or Michigan, an educational revolution is occurring—or perhaps it would be more apt to say, an evolution is occurring—with districts making the shift from using Response to Intervention (RtI) and Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), to using Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS).
If you’ve been in education for any length of time, you’ve seen many innovations and initiatives come and go. In the book Simply Better: Doing What Matters Most to Change the Odds for Student Success, Bryan Goodwin compares the amount of information bombarding teachers to signal noise, the static crackles that interfere with clear reception on your radio. He writes, “…the preponderance of reports, information and ideas in the field of education may have the effect of drowning out the big ideas—the key underlying principles of what’s most important when it comes to improving the odds for life success for all students.”
So, is this shift from RtI and PBIS to MTSS simply static leading to more confusion, or is it more significant than that? To gain some insight, let’s take a look at the traditional use of the terms and the implications for educators today.
RtI gained popularity after the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) in 2004, which prompted educators to identify students with specific learning disabilities by measuring their response to scientific, research-based instruction. While there’s no commonly agreed upon definition of RtI, there is general consensus that the framework should include a multiple tiers of instruction and interventions, and the use of data and assessment to inform decisions and problem-solving at each tier. Ideally, RtI is a preventative, proactive, school-wide framework designed to address efficiently the needs of all students with an appropriate level of intensity to ensure strong outcomes.
PBIS has been around a bit longer than RtI, and there is more consensus regarding its definition and characteristics. PBIS is defined as a framework for enhancing the adoption and implementation of a continuum of evidence-based interventions to achieve academically and behaviorally important outcomes for all students. Key characteristics include using research-based practices to support students across all school settings (school-wide, non-classroom, classroom); establishing a continuum of behavior support practices and systems including universal screening, progress monitoring, team-based decision-making rules and procedures, and monitoring implementation fidelity; and using relevant data to guide decision-making.
Both RtI and PBIS have great strengths and research to support their use, but each also suffers from serious misconceptions. Because of the emphasis on using RtI for identifying students with learning disabilities, in many places it has become a set of hoops to jump through to get kids into special education, rather than a framework for addressing the needs of all learners. PBIS, on the other hand, is often misunderstood to be a ‘token economy’ with the use of tangible rewards for motivating students to do what they should be intrinsically motivated to do, rather than the direct instruction of behavioral expectations and providing students with descriptive feedback on how they are doing.
Another common point of confusion is whether RtI is inclusive of behavior and social-emotional interventions, or if those are a part of a separate system. In schools that problem-solve academics separately from behavior, students are sometime discussed in great depth by two different groups of people, both with great intentions, but not communicating and collaborating effectively. The end result: two sets of interventions not leveraging the benefits of each other (and sometimes working at odds with each other).
And that’s where MTSS comes in. Proponents like the name better than RtI, because it describes what the framework really is about—a multi-tiered system designed to support student outcomes; it’s what we should have called it from the start. Additionally, MTSS integrates academic and behavioral supports. In other words, rather than problem-solving academics in one room and behavior in another, teams work together to consider how academic challenges may influence observed behaviors, and vice-versa (whether for the whole school, small groups, or individuals). Other than that, the key characteristics of RtI and MTSS are the same: use of a continuum of evidence and research-based instruction and intervention practices to support students across all school settings; using relevant data or information to effectively and efficiently problem-solve; and establishing a continuum of practices and systems.
Now, we find ourselves back at the original question: Is this a revolution or an evolution? I think the answer is: It depends on how RtI and PBIS have been used in your school or system. If your educators see RtI as a means for getting students into special education, or if your teams consider behavior in isolation from academics, then this shift to MTSS is probably significant. However, if your implementation looks a lot like the definition of MTSS (integrated, preventative, problem-solving approach), then the shift is likely mere semantics.
Either way, what matters most in the end is not what we call it, but what we actually do and the results we achieve for our students.
Upcoming Meetings & Events
IT Webinar
Friday, Nov 6, 2015, 09:00 AM
undefined
Your GaDOE SDE Leadership Team
North Area
Area Program Manager- Phillip Luck
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Wendell Christian
Northwest Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Terri Gaspierik
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Amy Alderman
Northeast Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Susan White
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Kali Raju
Metro Area
Area Program Manager- Sam Taylor
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Mike O'Neal
Metro West Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Diana Forbes
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Lyn Wenzel
Metro East Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Iris Moran
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Paula Herrema
South Area
Area Program Manager- Patty Rooks
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Keith Barnett
Southwest Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Deborah McLendon
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Steve Olive
Southeast Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Darrel May
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Paula Cleckler
Atlanta Support Office
Program Manager- Joann Hooper
Director- Will Rumbaugh